From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5209CC433EF for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 16:23:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C63161373 for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 16:23:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236107AbhJEQZI (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Oct 2021 12:25:08 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44720 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233896AbhJEQZH (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Oct 2021 12:25:07 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-xd30.google.com (mail-io1-xd30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d30]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7867EC06174E for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 09:23:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd30.google.com with SMTP id y197so24944092iof.11 for ; Tue, 05 Oct 2021 09:23:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=M0Efx4uhwfEZ38PmTZibKc9Nb9ZIpo8xruB3JZpP6uY=; b=ngv9K44X7yg3xjCLFbT/JX4x2Urt8rVeiKPi8W3zQW+9ttlooQ0a6+fvDpFA7JygAl syiSYblYBf6k2hGFF1yUh3muW7BKpoxCAc4ZEv+VR/ljkzHpSTlLr8JDF1L8CEFe05Y0 r/UWVhUE1pMDv4VgAxh0kuqy8mxRaakm6ZA/PQJ2bmZN6r0kI/7/kIxNMAMDyV9VVnvd TGpdytgPyFxs0wcTyH0pxe1AHdCUJdskUIbGKro70Pvfa+1hkMh+Vk+yrw0IssXti+GA rrsnY7oDDvQuQVGzzOlOE0jKXad0XZnN2XDL1nXj1tbFbMYvW+WzVsPuPxRbiuNLg1bS paZw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=M0Efx4uhwfEZ38PmTZibKc9Nb9ZIpo8xruB3JZpP6uY=; b=A8OgnWCD00s5LdK0bb6R/NLMEK70PDPtX1aWotFWUYwqXLx6geQuuZyjXcsTRCUx9k ttwNuz9521WMsGvMOlt2o81FqcfqtknVjah6wxLbzsJZLiLEsNr06n90MGas6F2uyEHb O4W3fOjdoptc2EVKPpg8yKsSnj2RJAUdO/MJgA2NkwlLRmD8pySDS2ru7dSbUjoLdTf5 FpeV+R6458zHW6YWT+cTccsw0OzwNc9OAeAIEMDlnNkvGXCI5IEnUa7zGk+sR4iBEXv8 ZrtebETybK2Y1B5PNqgDl3KcDYifmCFCbr4SmkhoLZijQjcInpwtv2gl+97jRiJDv7F7 L2HA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533k5GNVwFNESRZNNFy/5J+jbOYvlWCoqUMMd0p7ULN9tH966kQi Qj0QlzmoNg1TB/ZZmDbtb12gKQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyRBO2ZaWNNx9oMLxgSdzZt7zm1f0qHmfeVh7Otsqjj8H9nU4lh/eapGuyMyQ4riKNsyq/nzg== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:9d44:: with SMTP id k4mr3043652iok.112.1633450995779; Tue, 05 Oct 2021 09:23:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.30] ([207.135.234.126]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k7sm2204139ilq.37.2021.10.05.09.23.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 05 Oct 2021 09:23:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/14] blk-mq: Reduce static requests memory footprint for shared sbitmap To: John Garry , kashyap.desai@broadcom.com Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ming.lei@redhat.com, hare@suse.de, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org References: <1633429419-228500-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> <81d9e019-b730-221e-a8c0-f72a8422a2ec@huawei.com> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <1217e922-8bd5-9c2c-b7b0-1b75fff9ee04@kernel.dk> Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2021 10:23:14 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <81d9e019-b730-221e-a8c0-f72a8422a2ec@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On 10/5/21 7:34 AM, John Garry wrote: > On 05/10/2021 13:35, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> Baseline is 1b2d1439fc25 (block/for-next) Merge branch 'for-5.16/io_uring' >>> into for-next >> Let's get this queued up for testing, thanks John. > > Cheers, appreciated > > @Kashyap, You mentioned that when testing you saw a performance > regression from v5.11 -> v5.12 - any idea on that yet? Can you describe > the scenario, like IO scheduler and how many disks and the type? Does > disabling host_tagset_enable restore performance? FWIW, I ran my usual peak testing on this and didn't observe any regressions. Caveat being that a) no scheduler is involved, and b) no shared tags. But at least that fast case/path is fine. -- Jens Axboe